omarfeliciano

oakenspirit

So, I would love some advice.
I have been posting shirt ideas for a few months now with little to slight success. I know the competition is fierce and that many of my ideas/art will lose by default when put next to some of the other designs but I am hoping to improve each week. (I'm truthfully pretty new to photoshop as I am more of an oldschool artist).

So, point being... this shirt, I was decently proud of AND I felt fit the Woot demographic... yet, I have 2 votes... 2. I know its likely too late to update and improve it but is there anything anyone would recommend about my style/format that may help in future derbies?

Mavyn

merlindylan wrote:I'm worried this submission might be taken the wrong way. I don't find the subject funny- in fact it saddens me that in many parts of the world slavery is still a reality. I think the image is eye catching and brings attention to something most people try to ignore. Maybe this image is too edgy for wooters but it's what I thought of as the worst job ever.

I'm not sure what the right way would be for this. Honestly. Particularly since you reference American slavery, which has been abolished for a long time.

tomspc

lyonscc wrote:Hey everyone - please vote again. For some reason, my original submission was rejected for "using photos", where there was not a single photo or illustration not of my own design used in this shirt.

This is really frustrating, since nobody had even suggested it (otherwise, I'd have given my work files to prove it).

I bet you were rejected because you neglected to put a unicorn or rainbow in your drawing. Follow the rules please! lol

ochopika

bluetuba wrote:Well, if you do have evidence that this isn't a photo you might want to present it lest this just get rejected again.

I agree you should do this. It looks like you drew the window washer by hand. You should prove it with a sketch or something.

Maybe the rejectionator is thinking about the fire, is that all hand-drawn? Sometimes things get rejected if they use a brush that is made from photos... not saying that's what you did, but maybe that's what it looks like.

tomspc

ochopika wrote:I agree you should do this. It looks like you drew the window washer by hand. You should prove it with a sketch or something.

Maybe the rejectionator is thinking about the fire, is that all hand-drawn? Sometimes things get rejected if they use a brush that is made from photos... not saying that's what you did, but maybe that's what it looks like.

If Woot had questions about this design they should have contacted the artist before just rejecting it and saying "looks like a photo". Look at all the votes that were lost. Every week I see a lot of questionable designs that I feel certain weren't hand sketched, I don't see those being rejected.

lyonscc

tomspc wrote:I bet you were rejected because you neglected to put a unicorn or rainbow in your drawing. Follow the rules please! lol

Brilliant! I should have thought of that.

A burning unicorn, falling through a rainbow coming out of the eye (just to stay in the theme of the design).

bluetuba wrote:Well, if you do have evidence that this isn't a photo you might want to present it lest this just get rejected again.

I have - I emailed it to them (jpgs of my illustrator scratch files, before applying the gradients).

Also, I figured that using the same gradient process on the title of the design (and to animate my "Vote" banner), would make it obvious I didn't use a photo.

I guess I was wrong on that score.

tjschaeffer wrote:You definitely got a raw deal. It doesn't look to me like any photos were used. Revoted.

Thanks! Just frustrated that I wasn't even asked, since nobody produced any "photos" it was supposedly made from. I purposely did not use the same design as the movie (the LotR eye is round, and uses a different color progression and iris style/pattern), just to avoid such accusations.

ochopika wrote:Maybe the rejectionator is thinking about the fire, is that all hand-drawn? Sometimes things get rejected if they use a brush that is made from photos... not saying that's what you did, but maybe that's what it looks like.

benjaminleebates

ochopika wrote:I agree you should do this. It looks like you drew the window washer by hand. You should prove it with a sketch or something.

Maybe the rejectionator is thinking about the fire, is that all hand-drawn? Sometimes things get rejected if they use a brush that is made from photos... not saying that's what you did, but maybe that's what it looks like.

I've seen, that if a halftone LOOKS like a photo, then it's beyond their ability to print. This could be the case here, just worded differently.

lyonscc

benjaminleebates wrote:I've seen, that if a halftone LOOKS like a photo, then it's beyond their ability to print. This could be the case here, just worded differently.

Hmmmmm.

The halftone conversion I used for the Shirt Comp is at their specifications for Photoshop halftones, and the AI file I gave them has all gradients (which they convert to halftones).

It's really not that complex of a design on the back end (1 object of each of the five colors, and 1 gradient layer for each color, with % gradients between 10 and 90). They have still not replied, but hopefully they will.

stiminey

odysseyroc

lyonscc wrote:Odyssey - I provided my base files. The window washer is in the same position as that guy (body position), but has a different squeegee and gear. Most of that gets blurred out by the fire, though.

lyonscc

Odyssey - I did look at that image as a reference (not as a trace) when I was making the "washer-guy", but his left arm is different (nothing being held in it, and it's in a different position), the right arm is different, and the squeegee is a different design and about 25% longer, the shading is different, and I didn't try to make pant legs or anything for him.

It's hard to tell some of the details, because most of the body is obscured in the flames, but I've never heard of anything being an issue with using a reference image, so long as you're not tracing or totally duplicating it.

growgreen

lyonscc wrote:Odyssey - I did look at that image as a reference (not as a trace) when I was making the "washer-guy", but his left arm is different (nothing being held in it, and it's in a different position), the right arm is different, and the squeegee is a different design and about 25% longer, the shading is different, and I didn't try to make pant legs or anything for him.

It's hard to tell some of the details, because most of the body is obscured in the flames, but I've never heard of anything being an issue with using a reference image, so long as you're not tracing or totally duplicating it.

lyonscc

Well, I did agree with Queen in that particular case, though I'm not quite sure there's a parallel here.

In this particular case, we're talking about the outline of a human body in a reaching position. I could have just pulled up DAZ Poser, or taken a picture of a family member in the same position as a reference.

Woot.com is operated by Woot Services LLC.
Products on Woot.com are sold by Woot, Inc., other than items on Wine.Woot which are sold by the seller specified on the product detail page.
Product narratives are for entertainment purposes and frequently employ
literary point of view;
the narratives do not express Woot's editorial opinion.
Aside from literary abuse, your use of this site also subjects you to Woot's
terms of use
and
privacy policy.
Woot may designate a user comment as a Quality Post, but that doesn't mean we agree with or guarantee anything said or linked to in that post.